R chek of package VR is broken (PR#1683)
Tue, 18 Jun 2002 17:57:02 +0200
>>>>> ripley writes:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 10:00:11PM +0200, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>> > and the under-qualified pilot applied it to a *binary* installed package,
>> > despite the emphasized warning.
>> I wonder if "R CMD check ... " could abort with an error message if it is
>> applied to a binary package?
> I am not sure how simple that is. It used to be hard to tell source
> and binary packages apart. What we can do is to test for Built: in
> the DESCRIPTION file, which will cope with people who have built the
> package recently.
This was introduced in 1.4 I think (?) so it seems we can change the
heuristics now to rely on the correspondence Built: <-> binary. I will
soon (once I have time again) change INSTALL accordingly.
> The trouble with idiot-proofing is anticipating the idiot: as far as I
> am aware this is a first.
> In all other cases I tried the INSTALL part of R CMD check failed.
We need better integration of INSTALL into check anyway. But we can
have more idiot-proofing in check as well. Something in the works is a
reorganization of INSTALL/check/build with something else needed for
creating front-matter stuff, and we also need to rethink the logic of
check (e.g., verify correctness of meta-information prior to trying to
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: email@example.com